On 7/13/06, Dana Tierney wrote: > Is the frame of reference law or journalistic ethics? Right now it looks to > me like Novak acted as a journalist, but abused his position in doing so. I > suppose that you might think that the New York Times acted out of spite, but > I don't agree.
So you think Novak acted out of spite but the Times didn't? I don't see how you're deciding good journalism from bad here. > yeah, according to unnamed officials. Those suspects, where are they? Those > Islamic charities -- isn't that how we wound up deporting Cat Sevens, for > crying out loud? That's the problem with getting all tricksy with your public > statements -- people stop believing a word you say. It's the NY Times exposing a secret program that the NYTimes claims it was working. Don't you see that if they believed it was working and the public has no benefit from knowing about the program, why publish it? I, actually the Times, gave you the names. You seem to think our legal system is useless so we should do everything possible to obstruct it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/message.cfm/forumid:5/messageid:211147 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
